Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Ivrnet

View Poll Results: What role do humans play in contributing to climate change?
Humans are the primary contributor to climate change 274 65.55%
Humans contribute to climate change, but not the main cause 109 26.08%
Not sure 22 5.26%
Climate change is a hoax 13 3.11%
Voters: 418. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-20-2019, 11:01 AM   #841
peter12
Franchise Player
 
peter12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Exp:
Default

If Canada wanted to make an outsize difference, why aren't we starting a federally managed initiative to subsidize the re-planting of 100 million hectares of trees? This seems like a no-brainer to me.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5471379/p...change-theory/
peter12 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to peter12 For This Useful Post:
Old 08-20-2019, 11:09 AM   #842
Tron_fdc
Has My Daddy Syndrome
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: I'm......fromdacity
Exp:
Default

From my limited knowledge of hydrogen from university you need to have the infrastructure to fuel hydrogen vehicles (fuel stations), a safe way to transport it, and there is the exploding car theory where if you get rear ended you blow up like a Pinto.

This was a long time ago though, I don't know how transportable and unstable it is nowadays.
Tron_fdc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2019, 01:17 PM   #843
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tron_fdc View Post
From my limited knowledge of hydrogen from university you need to have the infrastructure to fuel hydrogen vehicles (fuel stations), a safe way to transport it, and there is the exploding car theory where if you get rear ended you blow up like a Pinto.

This was a long time ago though, I don't know how transportable and unstable it is nowadays.
May be that we need to create an infrastructure that pushes hydrogen to a fuel cell generator where it is converted to electricity to charge batteries in cars.
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to New Era For This Useful Post:
Old 08-20-2019, 08:24 PM   #844
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12 View Post
If Canada wanted to make an outsize difference, why aren't we starting a federally managed initiative to subsidize the re-planting of 100 million hectares of trees? This seems like a no-brainer to me.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5471379/p...change-theory/
We are 2% of the words emmissions right now. The article states by planting 1 trillion trees trees you can get rid of 25 years of emmissions. So Canada just needs to plant 20 billion trees.

So for less than 20 billion dollars Canada could completely offset our current carbon impact. The current Carbon tax generates about 2.5 billion per year. So it sounds like Climate changed in Canada is solved.
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2019, 10:13 AM   #845
zamler
Franchise Player
 
zamler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era View Post
May be that we need to create an infrastructure that pushes hydrogen to a fuel cell generator where it is converted to electricity to charge batteries in cars.
Which is better

crude bitumen>oxygen injection>hydrogen>fuel cell>electricity
crude bitumen>oil>generator>electricity
crude bitumen>oxygen injection>hydrogen>generator>electricity
zamler is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2019, 10:19 AM   #846
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

If we could find a way to combine that hydrogen with carbon we would probably have a really high energy density fuel that could be transported easily and burned in pretty much anything.
__________________
Air Canada - We're not happy until you're not happy.
Telus - Almost as bad as Winnipeg.
Calgary Roads Dept - Ya, we'll get to that.
Fuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2019, 10:39 AM   #847
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zamler View Post
Which is better

crude bitumen>oxygen injection>hydrogen>fuel cell>electricity
crude bitumen>oil>generator>electricity
crude bitumen>oxygen injection>hydrogen>generator>electricity
crude bitumen>oxygen injection>hydrogen>fuel cell>electricity
crude bitumen>oxygen injection>hydrogen>generator>electricity


Essentially the same process. The important part is the sequestration of carbon in the ground and the safe transportation and use of hydrogen to generate electricity. I think it depends on which process is most efficient and gets the most energy out of the hydrogen molecule with the least amount of pollutants. I think the fuel cell is supposed to be more efficient than burning hydrogen to generate heat to drive a steam turbine.

crude bitumen>oil>generator>electricity

Not as efficient and very dirty. Does not help with the main problem of carbon release into the atmosphere. If you don't give a #### about the environment or solving the climate change challenge, then this is the solution for you! If you are trying to sequester carbon where it already is, while extracting the fuel we need, this is not a good idea. The intent of the proposed process is to extract hydrogen from the bitumen while leaving the nasty byproducts in the ground where they are. It's carbon capture without having to do the carbon capture after the fact.
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2019, 10:54 AM   #848
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzz View Post
if we could find a way to combine that hydrogen with carbon we would probably have a really high energy density fuel that could be transported easily, that didn't damage the atmosphere or contribute to climate change, and burned in pretty much anything.
fyp
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2019, 11:15 AM   #849
zamler
Franchise Player
 
zamler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era View Post
Essentially the same process. The important part is the sequestration of carbon in the ground and the safe transportation and use of hydrogen to generate electricity. I think it depends on which process is most efficient and gets the most energy out of the hydrogen molecule with the least amount of pollutants. I think the fuel cell is supposed to be more efficient than burning hydrogen to generate heat to drive a steam turbine.
I tried to find data on hydrogen burning turbine efficiency came up empty. A fuel cell needs a fair bit of nickel and also platinum I can see the cost and availability being an issue for large scale fuel cell production.
Quote:
crude bitumen>oil>generator>electricity

Not as efficient and very dirty. Does not help with the main problem of carbon release into the atmosphere.
Making batteries, solar cells, fuel cells, generators, motors, high voltage cable, electronics*, transformers etc. etc. all take energy to produce, very likely carbon based energy. Burning the oil directly does skip a whole bunch of energy hungry steps. That's one thing that grinds my gears hardly anyone is doing well to wheel calculations it's superficial nonsense hey look hydrogen has zero emissions.
Quote:
If you are trying to sequester carbon where it already is, while extracting the fuel we need, this is not a good idea. The intent of the proposed process is to extract hydrogen from the bitumen while leaving the nasty byproducts in the ground where they are. It's carbon capture without having to do the carbon capture after the fact.
And we're back to how much energy does it take to extract hydrogen via oxygen injection, or whatever the exact process is which we don't know at all because all the articles gloss over it.

* this is a big one, these high tech systems rely heavily on micro controllers and support circuity producing such is energy intensive, uses larges amounts of water and is very polluting both in production and disposal. I rarely see anyone talk about this.
zamler is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2019, 12:07 PM   #850
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zamler View Post
I tried to find data on hydrogen burning turbine efficiency came up empty. A fuel cell needs a fair bit of nickel and also platinum I can see the cost and availability being an issue for large scale fuel cell production.
https://www.ge.com/content/dam/gepow...Generation.pdf

The difference between the process in the above paper and the process being discussed is the sequestration of the carbon after the fact. That should be noted as a significant difference, but the efficiencies of the turbines should be similar.

I will say this, there is a cost for everything, including the drilling and extraction of oil or the mining of bitumen. That's one of the things that really grinds my gears is that people don't take into consideration the amount of money it takes to drill for these resources, build the facilities to process oil and gas, transport them, and so on. It is costly as well, but those costs are ignored in comparisons.

Quote:
Making batteries, solar cells, fuel cells, generators, motors, high voltage cable, electronics*, transformers etc. etc. all take energy to produce, very likely carbon based energy. Burning the oil directly does skip a whole bunch of energy hungry steps. That's one thing that grinds my gears hardly anyone is doing well to wheel calculations it's superficial nonsense hey look hydrogen has zero emissions.
So none of that stuff is needed to build a processing plant for oil? You can just pull oil out of the ground and burn it? Don't have to worry about refining the real icky stuff out of it? Don't have to worry about the effluent from that process and the pollution it creates? Don't have to worry about anything. Just have to take a cork screw, make a couple of twists, and there you go - free energy with no costs. I think we can agree there are substantial costs on that side of the ledger as well?

Quote:
And we're back to how much energy does it take to extract hydrogen via oxygen injection, or whatever the exact process is which we don't know at all because all the articles gloss over it.
You're right, we don't know. It would be nice to know what the exact costs are, but based on the potential gain in protection to our environment and drag on the effects of climate change, the cost would have to be astronomical not to go down this route. A POC is needed to understand.

Quote:
* this is a big one, these high tech systems rely heavily on micro controllers and support circuity producing such is energy intensive, uses larges amounts of water and is very polluting both in production and disposal. I rarely see anyone talk about this.
Come on. You don't think that there are massive amounts of micro-controllers and support circuitry in every step of the transmission or refinement process? I think you're ignoring the complex technology used to extract oil and refine the products, especially bitumen. I think we can assume that technology investment may be similar. If we get more information, then we can re-visit. As it is, we can agree its an unknown cost, but a similar process.
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to New Era For This Useful Post:
Old 08-21-2019, 04:35 PM   #851
blender
Powerplay Quarterback
 
blender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kamloops
Exp:
Default

I just stopped in and felt obliged to give props to New Era for doing some heavy lifting here.
Nice job.
blender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 11:39 AM   #852
FlameOn
Franchise Player
 
FlameOn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

It's coming out from Brazilian local newspapers that the Amazon rainforest wild fires were planned and coordinated by land developers and farmers ahead of time two weeks ago. This does not bode well for climate change longer term since the rainforest was one of the biggest carbon sinks on the planet.

https://www.inquisitr.com/5594380/tw...in-the-amazon/

How is climate change going to get under control with human greed always getting in the way? Media coverage is always giving the "balanced" view of climate change when it's near universal support for human responsibility in climate change among the scientific community.
FlameOn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 02:07 PM   #853
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

As mentioned in another thread, the Kochs contributed greatly to the destruction of the planet for a quick buck. No eulogizing expected from those in the scientific community.

Koch escapes the climate hell he helped create.
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 02:08 PM   #854
Weitz
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Are these the same fires that celebrities are tweeting 5-10 year old photos of? Along with fires from places like Montana?
Weitz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 02:24 PM   #855
accord1999
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz View Post
Are these the same fires that celebrities are tweeting 5-10 year old photos of? Along with fires from places like Montana?
And apparently where the actual fire activity in the entire Amazon is close to average:
Quote:
As of August 16, 2019, an analysis of NASA satellite data indicated that total fire activity across the Amazon basin this year has been close to the average in comparison to the past 15 years. (The Amazon spreads across Brazil, Peru, Colombia, and parts of other countries.) Though activity appears to be above average in the states of Amazonas and Rondônia, it has so far appeared below average in Mato Grosso and Pará, according to estimates from the Global Fire Emissions Database, a research project that compiles and analyzes NASA data.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/im...ires-in-brazil
accord1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2019, 02:37 PM   #856
La Flames Fan
THE Chuck Storm
 
La Flames Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz View Post
Are these the same fires that celebrities are tweeting 5-10 year old photos of? Along with fires from places like Montana?
Looks like it. I think that's more akin to people not doing due-diligence about what picture they use because the Amazon IS ON FIRE...

How bad?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-49433767

Seems like you're trying to minimize the fires as fake?
__________________

Mediapop Films
La Flames Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2019, 12:44 PM   #857
MelBridgeman
Franchise Player
 
MelBridgeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Most of the fires are planned on agricultural land that has already been deforested
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie Telford The chief of staff to the prime minister of Canada
“Line up all kinds of people to write op-eds.”
MelBridgeman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2019, 12:49 PM   #858
corporatejay
Franchise Player
 
corporatejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MelBridgeman View Post
Most of the fires are planned on agricultural land that has already been deforested
What fake news site did you get that from? www.ministeroftruth.brasil.gov

I mean they were "planned" but were done so at the expense of the environment because their government doesn't give a #### about climate change. Which is why what we do is so frivolous
__________________

Last edited by corporatejay; 08-25-2019 at 12:52 PM.
corporatejay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2019, 12:55 PM   #859
MelBridgeman
Franchise Player
 
MelBridgeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default Climate change and human responsibility

Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay View Post
What fake news site did you get that from? www.ministeroftruth.brasil.gov

I mean they were "planned" but were done so at the expense of the environment because their government doesn't give a #### about climate change. Which is why what we do is so frivolous
The New York Times as per Scientists. But it's a behind a paywall.

Quote:
Most of the fires were likely set by farmers preparing the land for next year’s planting, a common agricultural practice, said the scientists from the University of Maryland.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...fire-maps.html
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie Telford The chief of staff to the prime minister of Canada
“Line up all kinds of people to write op-eds.”

Last edited by MelBridgeman; 08-25-2019 at 02:20 PM.
MelBridgeman is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MelBridgeman For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 09:46 PM   #860
81MC
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Exp:
Default

It being a fairly normal practise is what should be the greatest issue. It’s not like the Amazon has been well preserved and this is a normal amount of burning. Several thousand km2 still being lost, and a President who is likely to allow that number to increase to the historically incredibly high number is rightfully giving people a wake up call.
It’s also not as if burning fields in Brazil is the only threat to the biome; feedstocks, biolfuel productions, resource, crop etc. I do fear society will focus on one thing while governments pretend to crackdown on the real issues, while the sole of the root causes are never addressed and we end up with save the rainforest stickers on the back of some Hybrid SUV out front of a Lululemon.
__________________
Quote:
Accused of assaulting a fish! Funniest thing I have ever heard.
81MC is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:57 PM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016